|
Here they're generally cited as derivative. To an extent that's true, but that's less said in England (in general). The reason is that they're seen as having a huge (mostly positive) cultural impact. They injected swagger and classicism back into rock, which was largely moribund in England at the time. The Madchester and Shoegazing scenes had just ended and Suede/Blur/Pulp-style Britpop was just starting to rise but hadn't taken hold of the mass consciousness.
It's fun to knock them, especially because the Gallaghers (Liam, especially) are such assholes and incredibly arrogant. After What's the Story they largely became a self-parody, recycling old hits and losing a lot of their melodic sense. What's easy to forget is that DM and (WTS)MG were really good rock albums. Yeah, Champagne Supernova and Wonderwall may have been dulled by overexposure, but they really are great songs. And their b-sides are fantastic - check out their b-sides compilation The Masterplan. They put many of their best songs on their b-sides.
In England I think Oasis will come to be seen as a VERY historically important band. Certainly not The Beatles or Led Zep or The Stones or The Who. But maybe similar to T. Rex (another largely overlooked British band in the US).
Like I said, I'm not so into their new stuff. I enjoyed Blur's latest release, Think Tank, more than Oasis' last album which was incredibly dull. I'll definitely pick up the new album, but like I said, I'm more interested in the new Coldplay album and the new Franz Ferdinand album.
|